In less than a week, the Netherlands will (once again) go to the polls[1]. After 11 months of political and administrative decline, the Schoof I cabinet fell last summer[2].
This fits within a broader pattern: politicians regularly clash over various political issues while their tone is often harsh – short-term politics prevails. Sometimes, it seems as if problems are impossible to solve.
Thanks to the constant fighting between parties, dissatisfaction increases and political trust decreases[3]. It’s a feeling many students recognize today.
That’s awkward in a time of geopolitical instability, anti-democratic movements, polarizing technology, and climate disruption. Our democracies should be stronger than ever to defend against these kinds of threats. But the opposite seems to be happening at the moment.
How then, can we arm ourselves against these developments? It’s actually simple. More democracy.
Fortunately, there are more and more places where ordinary citizens help write plans for major issues such as energy transition, migration, or housing shortages.
And this is no longer an incidental phenomenon. More residents are getting a permanent seat alongside elected government in a so-called citizen parliament[4].
From a citizens’ assembly to a citizen parliament
Many people now recognize the term citizens’ assembly, but for those who aren’t entirely clear on what a citizens’ assembly is, here’s a brief explanation:
A citizens’ assembly consists of approximately 100 randomly selected residents who together form a reflection of society. They discuss unresolved political issues with each other and experts. After discussions, they develop joint solutions for politicians to work with[5].
In a citizens’ assembly, ordinary citizens thus help politicians make decisions.
Citizens’ assemblies have many advantages: they deliver feasible, well-considered proposals on polarized issues while increasing trust among residents and between citizens and politic[6].
Citizens’ assemblies can also help participants better distinguish reliable sources from disinformation. They are no longer locked in their own bubble because they engage in conversation with each other and with experts.
But one-time citizens’ assemblies are not sufficient. Driving one lap around a circuit doesn’t make you Max Verstappen or Lewis Hamilton. For that, you must drive many laps[7].
With one-time citizens’ assemblies, the wheel must be reinvented each time. Consequently, citizens’ assemblies often fail to show their full potential[8].
That’s why we need a citizen parliament, writes Eva Rovers in her new book[9].
How does a citizen parliament work?
Citizen parliaments supplement our representative democracy[10]. Just as every country organizes its political parliament differently, a citizen parliament can take different forms.
A citizen parliament has five basic characteristics: sortition, democratic deliberation, continuity, rotation, and influence[11].
The first two characteristics are also present in a citizens’ assembly. Members are selected through weighted sortition to obtain a good reflection of society. The selected members then collectively deliberate to devise solutions.
The other three characteristics make a citizen parliament unique.
Citizens’ assemblies are often expensive. Moreover, political follow-up of recommendations is mediocre because they are one-time events[12]. A citizen parliament, on the other hand, is permanent. It consists of randomly selected and rotating residents, so that every year new people get a chance to participate.
It doesn’t consist of elected parties and is essentially an additional parliament. Residents are not bound to a political agenda and do not have to win the next elections.
In citizens’ assemblies, politicians usually decide the topic, whereas in a citizen parliament, residents do this themselves[13]. This allows residents to prioritize issues that politicians often overlook.
Unlike citizens’ assemblies that deliver recommendations, citizen parliaments could draft binding legislative proposals as they do in Paris, which we’ll explore soon.
A different conversation
While politicians often clash over positions and fiercely debate them, things work differently in a citizen parliament. The goal is not to be right or defend your own position, but to arrive at a new common position.
Not debate, but dialogue. Asking follow-up questions and trying to understand the other person. The emphasis is on commonalities that participants share, not the differences. Together they arrive at a recommendation that they hand over to politicians. It’s about consensus. The result is more trust and less distrust.
Success stories
Fortunately, there are already several successful experiments we can learn from.
East Belgium – the model[14]
The ‘Ostbelgien model’ essentially combines a citizen parliament with a one-time citizens’ assembly. The permanent citizens’ assembly formulates the question in consultation with other residents, which another group then works on and develops proposals for. The follow-up is then done again by the permanent citizens’ assembly. With this division, you guarantee independence and separation of powers[15].
Aachen – the citizens’ forum
Residents can make proposals online. Then voting rounds take place where popular topics proceed to the citizen parliament[16].
Paris: legislative proposals
The Paris assembly arguably has the most extensive power. Its citizens have the power to propose a draft Law direct to the City Council. If accepted, these proposals will be implemented[17].
Important lessons
All these experiments also brought important lessons.
First, follow-up is important. If you don’t take the outcomes seriously, you’re not taking your residents seriously either. When the French parliament dismissed the well-considered proposals of citizens on climate, this led to even more distrust[18].
Second, governments must be clear about what is and isn’t possible[19]. Roles must be well described: what are the tasks of the citizen parliament? What does politics commit to regarding follow-up[20]? Clear transparency is key.
A practical tip is not to come up with too many recommendations. This makes good follow-up difficult and can limit feasibility.
Finally, citizen parliaments must become permanently embedded in governance, independent from political whims[21]. Politicians and civil servants must learn to work with this parliament, while the citizen parliament must continue operating when a new government is formed[22].
Will your country be the first?
Governments must trust that residents can come up with original solutions to complex problems. Building new democratic fabric takes time, so implementation won’t be perfect at first. But by learning as they go, citizen parliaments can reach their full potential[23].
It’s a radical proposal, but it’s exactly what we need to counter authoritarian tendencies occurring worldwide. The more countries adopt these experiments as a new model, the stronger their democracies become.
So whether you study economics, medicine or politics itself, share this idea with your fellow students, friends and family and help make your country the first the implement a national citizen parliament. Together, we can make democracy everyone’s again.
[1] https://www.politico.eu/europe-poll-of-polls/netherlands/
[2] https://ecre.org/op-ed-the-fall-of-the-dutch-government-that-took-longer-than-expected/
[3] https://www.ipsos-publiek.nl/trend/vertrouwen-in-de-overheid/
[4] Other terms could be Permanent/ institutionalized Citizens’ Assemblies but in this article I’ll stick with Eva Rovers’s definition.
[5] https://assemblyguide.demnext.org
[6] https://www.ipsos-publiek.nl/actueel/een-goed-burgerberaad-kan-vertrouwen-in-bestuur-ten-goede-komen/
[7] https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6134190/2025/02/14/max-verstappen-sim-racing-f1/ : racers can spend hours upon hours working to nail their craft. For example, Verstappen spent 35 hours preparing for the virtual Nurburgring 24-hour race during the 2023 Imola race weekend. He prefers around 50 combined hours.
[8] https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65b77644e6021e9021de8916/6686de36a3267f42b846931f_KNOCA%20Briefing%20No.10%20June%202024.pdf – page 15
[9] https://kiosk.decorrespondent.nl/products/waarom-we-politiek-niet-alleen-aan-politici-kunnen-overlaten-eva-rovers
[10] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 194
[11] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: Page 42
[12] https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65b77644e6021e9021de8916/6686de36a3267f42b846931f_KNOCA%20Briefing%20No.10%20June%202024.pdf – page 4
[13] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: Page 45
[14]https://pure.unamur.be/ws/portalfiles/portal/43760057/Niessen_Reuchamps_2019_Designing_a_permanent_deliberative_citizens_assembly.pdf
[15] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page155
[16] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 121
[17] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 156
[18] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page108
[19] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 112
[20] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 127
[21] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 139
[22] https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65b77644e6021e9021de8916/6686de36a3267f42b846931f_KNOCA%20Briefing%20No.10%20June%202024.pdf – page 2
[23] Waarom we politiek niet alleen aan politici kunnen overlaten: page 132